Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[Digger]

The VO2 max thing is a personal mission of mine...Fran tried to put it down to a lone nut like me asking for it...when grappe and vayer also wanted it, as well as the original reporter.

As Hog pointed out, Brailsford was all happy to say you tell us what to do, what you want to see, that hopefully this is the first step...and then one other key thing is asked for...NO.

 

[Justinr]

My (quick) responce:

@Netserk – I never said you couldn’t do both. Strange and wasted post by you.

@Digger – I never said anyone who dopes doesn’t train hard. I just said that maybe people were lazy in the past when they were doping.

@DearWiggo – don’t know that one, you could be right

 

[Justinr]

Well if I want to participate in forums that is my right - they're open to all.

You posted this reply off the back of me making a comment about BC. I believe in BC and their aims. No doubt you will say that BC and the Olympic team were doping.

Well, if doping makes such a massive change to performance why the hell did they spend hundreds of thousands of $ with bike manufacturers, F1 windtunnels, etc.

Why not just dope them to the gills and go for it. Please explain....

Actually now I am going to take a new tack on this.

For the last few years the doubters have questioned Sky / Wiggins / Froome and have said "prove you are clean". And they say "dont use I never tested +ve".

Well you know what, I'm asking the doubters to prove Sky are doping. Not just hearsay, supposition, etc. but to actually PROVE they are doping.

Come on put your money where your mouth is and prove it.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Come on put your money where your mouth is and prove it.

Lots of evidence of doping, no proof of doping.

Have any evidence of cleanness?

 

[the sceptic]

Actually now I am going to take a new tack on this.

For the last few years the doubters have questioned Sky / Wiggins / Froome and have said "prove you are clean". And they say "dont use I never tested +ve".

Well you know what, I'm asking the doubters to prove Sky are doping. Not just hearsay, supposition, etc. but to actually PROVE they are doping.

Come on put your money where your mouth is and prove it.

how about this

 

[Benotti69]

Actually now I am going to take a new tack on this.

For the last few years the doubters have questioned Sky / Wiggins / Froome and have said "prove you are clean". And they say "dont use I never tested +ve".

Well you know what, I'm asking the doubters to prove Sky are doping. Not just hearsay, supposition, etc. but to actually PROVE they are doping.

Come on put your money where your mouth is and prove it.

You wouldn't believe it.

There is plenty of reasons to doubt Sky.

You read them all and now revert to Armstrong fans of "never tested positive" and worse 'prove he is doping', well we know the sport doesn't want to find doping, so how can the clinic?

You would be better off believing your boy is clean and forgetting about doping, but you are in the clinic hoping against hope he is clean because the clinic cant 'prove he is doping', but that hides that really you dont believe Sky are clean.

 

[BYOP88]

Have we all travelled back to the glory days of USPS/Armstrong?

Justinr has just jumped the shark.

 

[Afrank]

Actually now I am going to take a new tack on this.

For the last few years the doubters have questioned Sky / Wiggins / Froome and have said "prove you are clean". And they say "dont use I never tested +ve".

Well you know what, I'm asking the doubters to prove Sky are doping. Not just hearsay, supposition, etc. but to actually PROVE they are doping.

Come on put your money where your mouth is and prove it.

Here you go. http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=17412

Read through the whole thing, it'll probably take you a couple days, or weeks, but I'm sure you'll find every bit of evidence and every reason as to why we think Sky dope in there.

Now it's your turn. Prove how everything in there is incorrect and that Sky are clean. I patiently await your reply.

 

[Afrank]

My (quick) responce:

@Netserk – I never said you couldn’t do both. Strange and wasted post by you.

@Digger – I never said anyone who dopes doesn’t train hard. I just said that maybe people were lazy in the past when they were doping.

@DearWiggo – don’t know that one, you could be right

You miss their points. You asked why Sky spends so much on equipment and other things when they could just dope. You just don't start doping, start taking drugs and are suddenly the best in the world. You still have to put in the training, use the best equipment you can get, and do everything else right. Dopings just another part of the process of becoming one of the best just like proper nutrition or good equipment.

 

[thehog]

how about this

Stop. I miss him. He's not coming back is he?

 

[Merckx index]

It is not medically correct. I've posted links which show what Bilharzia does (lays eggs everywhere, which cause fibrosis of liver and kidneys), as well as posted a link to a study which shows that Bilharzia (and other, similar infections) do not affect hematocrit or VO2max.

John Swanson

Yes, but as I pointed out in the discussion here last summer, the antigens from the eggs do inactivate hemoglobin. This should definitely affect the biopassport, by altering the HT/Hb ratio, and also V02max. In fact, other studies have shown the disease is associated with anemia, and in the discussion of the study you cited, they conceded that other studies have shown a decrease in V02max in infected individuals. Also noteworthy that in the study you cited, the children actually had a higher mean V02max than healthy Canadian children in another study. One wonders about compensatory factors.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Yes, but as I pointed out in the discussion here last summer, the antigens from the eggs do inactivate hemoglobin. This should definitely affect the biopassport, by altering the HT/Hb ratio, and also V02max. In fact, other studies have shown the disease is associated with anemia, and in the discussion of the study you cited, they conceded that other studies have shown a decrease in V02max in infected individuals. Also noteworthy that in the study you cited, the children actually had a higher mean V02max than healthy Canadian children in another study. One wonders about compensatory factors.

My reading of the parasite symptoms seem to indicate pretty debilitating effects - bloody stool and the like. The study you linked (thanks for finding a free one ) does not seem to mention any of those symptoms, and mentions "chronic" cases for the symptoms they discuss.

What's the likelihood that Froome had a "chronic" (Cound mentions elsewhere Chris' brother allegedly was "riddled" with worms) case of the worms, yet suffered only coughs and colds?

Not asking you as a medico - just curious what your take would be.

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/schistosomiasis/Pages/Symptoms.aspx says:

If the parasites travel to the digestive system, they can cause the following symptoms:

feeling tired all the time (fatigue)
abdominal pain
bowel problems – such as mild or severe watery diarrhoea that contains blood and mucus

If the parasites travel to the urinary system, they can cause the following symptoms:

symptoms of cystitis – such as pain when urinating
frequent need to urinate
blood in your urine

If the parasites travel to the heart or lungs, they can cause the following symptoms:

persistent cough – in some cases, people cough up blood
wheezing
feeling breathless and very tired after physical activity

If the parasites travel to the central nervous system or brain, they can cause the following symptoms:

seizures (fits)
headache
back pain
urinary incontinence
weakness and numbness in your legs
dizziness
feeling sick

According to Chris and Michelle, Froome experienced only:

fatigue (digestive system infestation)
cough (heart / lungs)

I believe this is a very lucky set of symptoms to experience, given the list of possibilities. (If he comes out later and says he was suffering other things as well I will roll my eyes). I also believe, that if he was expelling or coughing up blood that he would have noticed and seen a doctor long before an anti-doping blood test picked up the presence of the disease.

Now, whilst these symptoms could definitely affect his performance 2010/2011, I struggle to believe they would be present in 2008, when, despite his young age, he's still a hack.

 

[thehog]

Also noteworthy that in the study you cited, the children actually had a higher mean V02max than healthy Canadian children in another study. One wonders about compensatory factors.

Hang on!

You mean they tested those little kiddies for vo2 max? and we can't get the Dawg in the lab for a test!??

 

[the sceptic]

Stop. I miss him. He's not coming back is he?

I hope he comes back sometime. He is one of my favourite posters.

 

[thehog]

I hope he comes back sometime. He is one of my favourite posters.

He writes like no other. Very thoughtful and his posts always have this sharp point hidden beneath. A good writer can use subtext like a weapon.

That's Bro. Fingers crossed. Unless he's out there writing a movie about online forums....

 

[peloton]

Actually now I am going to take a new tack on this.

For the last few years the doubters have questioned Sky / Wiggins / Froome and have said "prove you are clean". And they say "dont use I never tested +ve".

Well you know what, I'm asking the doubters to prove Sky are doping. Not just hearsay, supposition, etc. but to actually PROVE they are doping.

Come on put your money where your mouth is and prove it.

Dr. Leinders says hi.

 

[The Hitch]

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/schistosomiasis/Pages/Symptoms.aspx
I believe this is a very lucky set of symptoms to experience, given the list of possibilities. (If he comes out later and says he was suffering other things as well I will roll my eyes). I also believe, that if he was expelling or coughing up blood that he would have noticed and seen a doctor long before an anti-doping blood test picked up the presence of the disease.

It says "can cause", not "will cause". None of those symptoms are guaranteed. There is nothing strange if someone with Bilharzia suffers none of them even.

You are barking up the wrong tree. Its certain that Sky have clearly lied/ been horribly misinformed, about Froome's bilharzia because several of its characteristics are supernatural (the idea of eggs hatching in the body) and the length, timeline and performance aspects make no sense (winning the TDF with Bilharzia, requiring 6 treatments over 3 years etc). From a non medical perespective, the constant total inability to get dates straight and the ultra suspicious keeping it a secret for 8 months until the Vuelta.

That his symptoms don't 100% match the symptoms on a nhs maybe list is not a reason.

There is a big difference between pointing out massive factual innacuracies in what Sky's official account of the Bilharzia, ie when Brailsford says Bilharzia lasts forever pointing out that this is factually incorrect, and playing internet doctor based on an incomplete unsubstantial summary of what his symptoms may have been.

 

[Granville57]

For the last few years the doubters have questioned Sky / Wiggins / Froome and have said "prove you are clean". And they say "dont use I never tested +ve".

Well you know what, I'm asking the doubters to prove Sky are doping. Not just hearsay, supposition, etc. but to actually PROVE they are doping.

Come on put your money where your mouth is and prove it.

What would constitute "proof"?

We had eye witness testimony against Armstrong, but the true believers then insisted on "video evidence."

Where does it end?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

It says "can cause", not "will cause". None of those symptoms are guaranteed. There is nothing strange if someone with Bilharzia suffers none of them even.

You are barking up the wrong tree. Its certain that Sky have clearly lied/ been horribly misinformed, about Froome's bilharzia because several of its characteristics are supernatural (the idea of eggs hatching in the body) and the length, timeline and performance aspects make no sense (winning the TDF with Bilharzia, requiring 6 treatments over 3 years etc). From a non medical perespective, the constant total inability to get dates straight and the ultra suspicious keeping it a secret for 8 months until the Vuelta.

That his symptoms don't 100% match the symptoms on a nhs maybe list is not a reason.

There is a big difference between pointing out massive factual innacuracies in what Sky's official account of the Bilharzia, ie when Brailsford says Bilharzia lasts forever pointing out that this is factually incorrect, and playing internet doctor based on an incomplete unsubstantial summary of what his symptoms may have been.

We are really having miscommunication issues, you and I.

Nowhere do I say Froome has to experience these symptoms. As a native English speaker, I am well aware that they are listed as "can cause", not "will cause".

In fact, in my post, I say, "given the possibilities", where possibilities = " can cause ", not "will cause".

I am also not playing Internet doctor.

All I am saying, as is evidenced in what I have written, is that Froome is very lucky to have experienced only the mildest, nicest, easily handleable symptoms, and none of the more debilitating symptoms. My post in no way, expressed or implied, seeks to disprove Froome had Bilzharia. Take my posts at face value.

 

[the sceptic]

What would constitute "proof"?

We had eye witness testimony against Armstrong, but the true believers then insisted on "video evidence."

Where does it end?

If Froome climbs hautacam at 7.0w/kg with a blood bag hanging from his bike and Dr Leinders injecting him from the sky car, it still wouldnt be enough.

"Whats in the bag", People would ask. "It could be anything. Unless you have any evidence it is blood, we must assume it was just randomly placed there, and could be any liquid with a red colour. I refuse to have an opinion on what the constitues of the bag might be. For all we know, it could come form a parallel universe, or it could be a hallucination."

 

[BYOP88]

If Froome climbs hautacam at 7.0w/kg with a blood bag hanging from his bike and Dr Leinders injecting him from the sky car, it still wouldnt be enough.

"Whats in the bag", Martin Vickers would ask. "It could be anything. Unless you have any evidence it is blood, we must assume it was just randomly placed there, and could be any liquid with a red colour. I refuse to have an opinion on what the constitues of the bag might be. For all we know, it could come form a parallel universe, or it could be a hallucination."

Well Dr Brailsford did say that clean performances will soon outstrip the dirty ones, so 7.0w/kg will probably happen this July, might happen in May if little Richie gets his *** into gear.

Probably beetroot juice, all cyclists love a little juice from time to time.

 

[thehog]

If Froome climbs hautacam at 7.0w/kg with a blood bag hanging from his bike and Dr Leinders injecting him from the sky car, it still wouldnt be enough.

"Whats in the bag", Martin Vickers would ask. "It could be anything. Unless you have any evidence it is blood, we must assume it was just randomly placed there, and could be any liquid with a red colour. I refuse to have an opinion on what the constitues of the bag might be. For all we know, it could come form a parallel universe, or it could be a hallucination."

For me. Froome climbing in a straight line & not falling off is a major achievement.

 

[Granville57]

If Froome climbs hautacam at 7.0w/kg with a blood bag hanging from his bike and Dr Leinders injecting him from the sky car, it still wouldnt be enough.

Yup. Even the most damning evidence in the form of any pic or video would then be analyzed to death as to whether or not said evidence had been digitally manipulated. (A fair question in this day and age, but still...)

Which leads us to something worth remembering:

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not involve proof to an absolute certainty. It is not proof beyond any doubt, nor is it an imaginary or frivolous doubt.

 

[Ripper]

Actually now I am going to take a new tack on this.

For the last few years the doubters have questioned Sky / Wiggins / Froome and have said "prove you are clean". And they say "dont use I never tested +ve".

Well you know what, I'm asking the doubters to prove Sky are doping. Not just hearsay, supposition, etc. but to actually PROVE they are doping.

Come on put your money where your mouth is and prove it.

Wow ... you've jumped the shark my friend. By any chance were you an Armstrong supporter?

 

[Digger]

My (quick) responce:

@Netserk – I never said you couldn’t do both. Strange and wasted post by you.

@Digger – I never said anyone who dopes doesn’t train hard. I just said that maybe people were lazy in the past when they were doping.

@DearWiggo – don’t know that one, you could be right

You said why do they spend so much on this stuff if they are also doping...so it was yet another pointless question, when you seemingly don't even believe it yourself.


Links for anyone who was lazy when they doped? Or is that you making stuff up?